<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: One more news tidbit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 17:40:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DeltaLawMama</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63029</link>
		<dc:creator>DeltaLawMama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:04:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63029</guid>
		<description>Didn&#039;t recall the phone call.  Guess it was so long ago, back in prehistory.  One day this will make a great movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Didn&#8217;t recall the phone call.  Guess it was so long ago, back in prehistory.  One day this will make a great movie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lotus</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63022</link>
		<dc:creator>lotus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:53:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63022</guid>
		<description>Well, DLM, the classic Deb P story was her squawk to the WSJ at Dickie&#039;s &#039;07 Christmas party -- right after this started -- that she and Steve just didn&#039;t know a thing about it because they&#039;d been off in &quot;the Holy Land gettin&#039; all &lt;em&gt;edified&lt;/em&gt;&quot; (I paraphrase, but closely) when it came down. But then turns out Steve&#039;s on tape telling Balducci that ol&#039; Deb &quot;was just on the foam with P.L.&quot; . . .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, DLM, the classic Deb P story was her squawk to the WSJ at Dickie&#8217;s &#8217;07 Christmas party &#8212; right after this started &#8212; that she and Steve just didn&#8217;t know a thing about it because they&#8217;d been off in &#8220;the Holy Land gettin&#8217; all <em>edified</em>&#8221; (I paraphrase, but closely) when it came down. But then turns out Steve&#8217;s on tape telling Balducci that ol&#8217; Deb &#8220;was just on the foam with P.L.&#8221; . . .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DeltaLawMama</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63019</link>
		<dc:creator>DeltaLawMama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:48:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63019</guid>
		<description>Every once in a while, I see Debbie Patterson&#039;s name crop up.  What do we know, or suspect, about her being wrapped up in this mess?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Every once in a while, I see Debbie Patterson&#8217;s name crop up.  What do we know, or suspect, about her being wrapped up in this mess?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NMC</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63017</link>
		<dc:creator>NMC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:40:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63017</guid>
		<description>I think it was total baseless speculation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it was total baseless speculation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anderson</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63014</link>
		<dc:creator>Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:35:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63014</guid>
		<description>Witness protection would be all too conspicuous for P.L. Blake.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Witness protection would be all too conspicuous for P.L. Blake.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lotus</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63009</link>
		<dc:creator>lotus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:30:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63009</guid>
		<description>Who was it that said that? Don&#039;t recall where it came from, but it was just the flat statement, no supporting deets.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who was it that said that? Don&#8217;t recall where it came from, but it was just the flat statement, no supporting deets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NMC</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63006</link>
		<dc:creator>NMC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:27:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63006</guid>
		<description>why would P.L. Blake be in witness protection? huh?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>why would P.L. Blake be in witness protection? huh?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lotus</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63005</link>
		<dc:creator>lotus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63005</guid>
		<description>Right, wc. But I bet he isn&#039;t there now. Somebody suggested yesterday that he&#039;s in witness-protection, but I don&#039;t recall that we&#039;ve ever definitively established that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right, wc. But I bet he isn&#8217;t there now. Somebody suggested yesterday that he&#8217;s in witness-protection, but I don&#8217;t recall that we&#8217;ve ever definitively established that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: watching closely</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63001</link>
		<dc:creator>watching closely</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-63001</guid>
		<description>The is a P.(resley) L. Blake listed in Birmingham with a former residence in Greenwood.  I seem to remember an old thread that had P. L. in Birmingham as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The is a P.(resley) L. Blake listed in Birmingham with a former residence in Greenwood.  I seem to remember an old thread that had P. L. in Birmingham as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RandomThoughts</title>
		<link>http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-62987</link>
		<dc:creator>RandomThoughts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:25:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/#comment-62987</guid>
		<description>I agree that it is looking bad for DeLaughter, I&#039;m just waiting a wee bit longer to pass judgment. I&#039;ve reached the preponderance of the evidence stage but I haven&#039;t got to beyond reasonable doubt yet. 

Even with the mail fraud charges the prosecutors will still have to prove Delaughter&#039;s knowledge of the scheme. The emailed orders will all tend to corroborate the existence of a conspiracy, and Delaughter&#039;s participation in it. 

However, if a prosecutor wanted to know what I needed to convict as a juror, I am waiting for some evidence that Delaughter had knowledge of the existence of the conspiracy. The Mitchell story, which I didn&#039;t see,  comes very close to showing that Delaughter knew about the conspiracy. Possibly there was more said before the grand jury that incriminates Delaughter, I don&#039;t know at this point. The key for me is Peters&#039; testimony, and possibly Scruggs, Langston, Balducci, maybe Zach maybe others? that tends to show Delaughter knew of the conspiracy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that it is looking bad for DeLaughter, I&#8217;m just waiting a wee bit longer to pass judgment. I&#8217;ve reached the preponderance of the evidence stage but I haven&#8217;t got to beyond reasonable doubt yet. </p>
<p>Even with the mail fraud charges the prosecutors will still have to prove Delaughter&#8217;s knowledge of the scheme. The emailed orders will all tend to corroborate the existence of a conspiracy, and Delaughter&#8217;s participation in it. </p>
<p>However, if a prosecutor wanted to know what I needed to convict as a juror, I am waiting for some evidence that Delaughter had knowledge of the existence of the conspiracy. The Mitchell story, which I didn&#8217;t see,  comes very close to showing that Delaughter knew about the conspiracy. Possibly there was more said before the grand jury that incriminates Delaughter, I don&#8217;t know at this point. The key for me is Peters&#8217; testimony, and possibly Scruggs, Langston, Balducci, maybe Zach maybe others? that tends to show Delaughter knew of the conspiracy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  www.folo.us/2009/02/10/one-more-news-tidbit/feed/ ) in 0.28856 seconds, on Feb 10th, 2012 at 12:53 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 17th, 2012 at 12:53 am UTC -->
